The Mastermind Wishlist: Completed, Uncut, and En Masse

[Galaxy Brain]

2 hours ago, WindDemon21 said:

Thus becoming the mandatory 2-3 slits for each def/ res stat like I mentioned. No thanks.

Not if they're only partially enhanceable. 

[WindDemon21]

7 hours ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Not if they're only partially enhanceable. 

Even then you would still feel obligated to slot them to enhance the def/resist for your pets for how squishy they can be and how horrendous it is if they die and you have to rebuff them after summoning them. Maybe if they FIXED those training powers per my suggestions above it wouldnt be as necessary.

[Monos King]

27 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

Even then you would still feel obligated to slot them to enhance the def/resist for your pets for how squishy they can be and how horrendous it is if they die and you have to rebuff them after summoning them. Maybe if they FIXED those training powers per my suggestions above it wouldnt be as necessary.

Hmmm. I think your misunderstanding the change in how they would be from how they are. There is really no way that these change would continue the pattern of slot taxing, I had removing slot tax in mind specifically when I proposed them.

 

We aren't catering to your specific play style or personal feelings about what you'll feel pressed to do when your pets die. We're trying to remedy the general shortcomings and get necessary buffs. We're improving what has been; you're pretty much saying that even if we do improve, your going to want your pets even stronger so now it's a penalty to do so. That's just preference. That's ok, you can slot for that, but we can't consider that preference with archetype/enhancement  wide changes. 

 

Here's the gist of it. Right now, you need to clear 6 slots for aura buffs that are mandatory for pet survival. With the training buff change:

1. Res/def aura buffs split between the two Equip and Upgrade training abilities
2. All powers have one slot by default, thus even one invention enhancement will be a straight *buff* to the existing numbers from the proposed mandatory lower values.
3. Proposed new IO set will maintain existing aura strength as well as provide possibility for debuff res or something of that nature
4. As compared to now: 4 slots saved (archetype origins wont be changed)

If you decide that you want even more res/def on your pets and decide to slot the equips further with that in mind, that is not a mandatory slit; it's ordinary slotting. But if this went through, it would be, with one enhancement, the same strength auras, no cost, available far earlier, room for new IOs. As far as I know, we all agree that the current values of auras are quite good.  Hence why they are considered tax to begin with.

Edited March 27, 2020 by Monos King

[WindDemon21]

7 minutes ago, Monos King said:

Hmmm. I think your misunderstanding the change in how they would be from how they are. There is really no way that these change would continue the pattern of slot taxing, I had removing slot tax in mind specifically when I proposed them.

 

We aren't catering to your specific play style or personal feelings about what you'll feel pressed to do when your pets die. We're trying to remedy the general shortcomings and get necessary buffs. We're improving what has been; you're pretty much saying that even if we do improve, your going to want your pets even stronger so now it's a penalty to do so. That's just preference. That's ok, you can slot for that, but we can't consider that preference with archetype/enhancement  wide changes. 

 

Here's the gist of it. Right now, you need to clear 6 slots for aura buffs that are mandatory for pet survival. With the training buff change:

1. Res/def aura buffs split between the two Equip and Upgrade training abilities
2. All powers have one slot by default, thus even one invention enhancement will be a straight *buff* to the existing numbers from the proposed mandatory lower values.
3. Proposed new IO set will maintain existing aura strength as well as provide possibility for debuff res or something of that nature
4. As compared to now: 4 slots saved (archetype origins wont be changed)

If you decide that you want even more res/def on your pets and decide to slot the equips further with that in mind, that is not a mandatory slit; it's ordinary slotting. But if this went through, it would be, with one enhancement, the same strength auras, no cost, available far earlier, room for new IOs. As far as I know, we all agree that the current values of auras are quite good.  Hence why they are considered tax to begin with.

Then you aren't getting any end reduction or less end reduction for powers that are already way too high of an end cost when they shouldn't even be click powers, or even exist at all per my suggestions above.

 

At any rate even if this were to go through I would say the BASE value should be equal to those IOs, and that those training powers should be pbaoe with far less or then zero end cost.

 

I think MMs would be far better off as well if they moved the 2nd training power to 18, the level 18 power to 26, and the big pet to 32, since even those are vastly less useful without that 2and training power at any rate.

[Monos King]

1 hour ago, WindDemon21 said:

Then you aren't getting any end reduction or less end reduction for powers that are already way too high of an end cost

lol that is correct. You would also not be getting a ranged damage buff, a heal buff, a chance to crit, higher hold magnitude, or any other specificity of playing a mastermind that other archetypes receive. 

 

Because we weren't discussing end reduction. You can always point out what wasn't being discussed, but you can't just slide it in as if that were relevant to the subject matter in any way. That would best be left for a separate reply.

 

I'm going out of my way to make note of these issues with your suggestions because such suggestions will simply never occur; not on a server concerned with any sort of balance or connection to the original game that people chose to play. Calls to remove the main handicaps/nuances of classes will be totally ignored 100% of the time, unless there was lasting grounds for contention like the damage difference between brutes and tanks. 

 

1 hour ago, WindDemon21 said:

the BASE value should be equal to those IOs

We can't do that because it would start to impede on the relevance of buffs secondaries. Otherwise we couldn't let them be enhanceable, and the idea for the new IO set pretty much dies. 

1 hour ago, WindDemon21 said:

I think MMs would be far better off as well if they moved the 2nd training power to 18, the level 18 power to 26, and the big pet to 32, since even those are vastly less useful without that 2and training power at any rate.

I think this is an interesting idea, although it definitely depends on the playstyle. Generally, it would be bettter to get the pets sooner because of how much less damage the extra pet makes you take in bodyguard mode.

[Galaxy Brain]

2 hours ago, Monos King said:

I think this is an interesting idea, although it definitely depends on the playstyle. Generally, it would be bettter to get the pets sooner because of how much less damage the extra pet makes you take in bodyguard mode.

This very much depends on the pets... for that gap between 26 and 32, the extra offense or even straight defense (Protector bots, etc) can more than make up for the Boss pet for a few levels.

[Monos King]

Just now, Galaxy Brain said:

This very much depends on the pets... for that gap between 26 and 32, the extra offense or even straight defense (Protector bots, etc) can more than make up for the Boss pet for a few levels.

Oh yeah no doubt. The protectors and enforcers get their +def by the first equip though right? I'm not against this idea by a long shot, definitely just needs more player reception to decide. If everyone ends up liking that I'm all for it.

[Galaxy Brain]

Protector bots get a second shield and AoE mez/debuff with the 2nd upgrade, and the minions get full auto lasers. 

 

Itd definitely be something to test at least 

[WindDemon21]

6 hours ago, Monos King said:

Because we weren't discussing end reduction. You can always point out what wasn't being discussed, but you can't just slide it in as if that were relevant to the subject matter in any way. That would best be left for a separate reply.

Except it wouldn't be, since this thread delves into ALL aspects of masterminds. And the two are directly related. I do understand what you were saying before and for the regular pet/recharge pet ios that ONLY buff def/res that would be completely fine and I back that. The issue comes mainly from the MM atos since those also buff a stat for the pet themselves.

 

It does also a lot go back to the main issue of those training powers. If they dont want to get rid of them, ok that's one thing, but they should reorder the powers as I suggested, and those training powers need to be an auto pbaoe aura that proc casts the training on nearby pets.

 

There is no reason that we should have to resummom pets, they die sometimes even while being summoned, then train them, TWICE for them to be of any use. Then they could immediately die again, or soon having to do it all over again.

 

It's especially aggravating when just one or two of the min/lt dies so you resummon, and while you're waiting for them to summon before you can even click them, and then try to train them, oops your other pets died, so now you have to do it all over again for the other set of pets.

 

In NO way is this mechanic anywhere near necessary or fun at all on MMs. As much fun as I can have with them, it's the number one thing that makes me just not want to deal with playing them often times.

 

If nothing else ever changes on MMs, making the training powers auto pbaoe auras is a must, or even better make them fully auto where "just having this power gives your pets these abilities". Like how field medic works to give end bonus to aid self, or just having fortify pack gives the beasts a chance eit chance. This would be the optimal solution for those training powers.

 

For the MM progression, it would make sense to move the powers around as I suggested prior, and allowing the training powers to accept pet IOs would be fine.

 

Edit: Also unless the training powers can accept pet IOs, as it sounds like you're saying that they instead just act like a straight buff, then you would be able to also slot those pet IOs as well.

 

I'm pretty sure it would be impossible (or at least take way too much time it would never happen) to code it so that you can't use just those unique IOs of those sets. Likewise they definitely shouldn't make it so the pets themselves can't take those much needed sets.

 

There also does not exist, and won't exist a way to enhance the value of a unique IO itself, so I'm really not sure how you think it would work to enhance the def/res values on the training powers without being able to have that and still slot those pet IOs on top of that.

Edited March 27, 2020 by WindDemon21

[Monos King]

53 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

Except it wouldn't be, since this thread delves into ALL aspects of masterminds.

Ohhhh you'll have to forgive me, I didn't quite understand what you were saying at the time. I think I get it now; I believe you are saying that the slot would be used for the IO is usually used for -end enhancement, right? This could be easily remedied by simply reducing the endurance cost. That's a great suggestion on your part. And with these changes going through (higher survivability of pets through equip buffs, level being the same as caster) in combat summoning and requipping should be lower anyway. Sorry bout that.

53 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

Edit: Also unless the training powers can accept pet IOs, as it sounds like you're saying that they instead just act like a straight buff, then you would be able to also slot those pet IOs as well.

 

I'm pretty sure it would be impossible (or at least take way too much time it would never happen) to code it so that you can't use just those unique IOs of those sets. Likewise they definitely shouldn't make it so the pets themselves can't take those much needed sets.

You kind of lost me here. The IO's I was referring to were the non-existing proposed IOs that would go into the newly buffed equip powers. Naturally, as the change to make equips add def and res were to replace the current auras (besides the ATO), the current aura's would cease to provide def/res buffs and would do something else. I would like to see them converted into procs or something, but I think that's something for us all to discuss.

[Herotu]

What's the MM's role? Survive and contribute to damage? I guess it depends on their Secondary?

 

The answer to this would determine my response to the OP.

Edited March 27, 2020 by Herotu

[WindDemon21]

8 hours ago, Monos King said:

Ohhhh you'll have to forgive me, I didn't quite understand what you were saying at the time. I think I get it now; I believe you are saying that the slot would be used for the IO is usually used for -end enhancement, right? This could be easily remedied by simply reducing the endurance cost. That's a great suggestion on your part. And with these changes going through (higher survivability of pets through equip buffs, level being the same as caster) in combat summoning and requipping should be lower anyway. Sorry bout that.

You kind of lost me here. The IO's I was referring to were the non-existing proposed IOs that would go into the newly buffed equip powers. Naturally, as the change to make equips add def and res were to replace the current auras (besides the ATO), the current aura's would cease to provide def/res buffs and would do something else. I would like to see them converted into procs or something, but I think that's something for us all to discuss.

That's what I thought you were saying, which would be no good, because then it hurts any non-MM pets since they no longer get the extra def/res, like imps who really need it.

[Galaxy Brain]

Wait, I thought the idea was to remove the Defensive ATO's and put those into the upgrades, not the other auras?

[Monos King]

11 hours ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Wait, I thought the idea was to remove the Defensive ATO's and put those into the upgrades, not the other auras?

Lol no the original idea was to remove the other 4 auras and put it into the upgrades, a concept which would transform into whatever the community decided it would be. Expedient and Sovereign are recharge intensive, not ATOs. If everyone decided doing it with solely the defensive ATOs would be better overall, I would be in favor of that. I'm fine with any useful degree of buff in the equips.

 

I know that putting the other 4 into equip and upgrade would save 4 tax slots. A lot of people seem in favor of that, and having the current auras replaced with procs of some kind. I wasn't aware any troller pets actually needed the auras; they have way higher survivability.

 

But if they did, that could just be fixed by leaving recharge intensive pet IOs the way they are, but removing the option to slot them in masterminds. Players that actually used the Rech Intensive enhancements would find themselves able to use the new Upgrade Integral Pets IOs which have the same set bonuses and come with procs like what I mentioned on page one. If we are keeping the non ATO res and def auras, these would come in resistance, def, and damage set's and be slottable in henchmen equips and the henchmen summons. This seems like a lot more though, especially since controll pets are quite strong.

 

Between the higher base resistances and the controller/doms ability to CC enemies and buff, I was under no impression any troller was in need of those auras. And in this case they would get an assortment of procs instead.

Edited March 28, 2020 by Monos King
Emphasis

[WindDemon21]

Generally due to the control yes they do survive better, but that doesn't mean that this change should ill-effect any builds that do use them for the sake of MMs, Spiders come to mind.

 

And without the support sets, doms could use them as well. I think what we need to find is a way that it works for both. I think allowing the pet atos to be used in MM attacks would be the easiest solution.

 

As per the training powers, i would start with my suggestions above about reordering the powers, but on top of them needing to be auto auras, I always thought that for the skills they give, that you should be able to slot the training powers for that. Perhaps reworking those training powers to affect supremacy. So they would be auto, but then "automatically adds training to supremacy", and in addition to the acc/to hit of supremacy, the equip/upgrade would have the ability to slot the aura procs as well.

[Monos King]

1 hour ago, WindDemon21 said:

Generally due to the control yes they do survive better, but that doesn't mean that this change should ill-effect any builds that do use them for the sake of MMs, Spiders come to mind.

Yeah I don't think the change would. I was talking to a few controllers and it seems like a negligible bonus that they added just for reassurance. Auras seem to exist for masterminds. If you could provide specific instances of why controller/dom pets need the auras it would possibly help.

 

Spiders? Like the VEATS? Their abilities don't hinge on their pet survivability at all so I don't consider them in this discussion. It'd be like saying "but wait my blood widow summon as a scrapper will be slightly less durable". And even without auras, their pets are *still* way more resilient than mastermind pets. To the extent I would honestly say if your using auras on VEATS you are probably wasting slots. Again, if you could give specific instances suggesting otherwise, that could change the argument a bit.

[WindDemon21]

3 hours ago, Monos King said:

Yeah I don't think the change would. I was talking to a few controllers and it seems like a negligible bonus that they added just for reassurance. Auras seem to exist for masterminds. If you could provide specific instances of why controller/dom pets need the auras it would possibly help.

 

Spiders? Like the VEATS? Their abilities don't hinge on their pet survivability at all so I don't consider them in this discussion. It'd be like saying "but wait my blood widow summon as a scrapper will be slightly less durable". And even without auras, their pets are *still* way more resilient than mastermind pets. To the extent I would honestly say if your using auras on VEATS you are probably wasting slots. Again, if you could give specific instances suggesting otherwise, that could change the argument a bit.

Jack frost is a perfect example. He has 25% defense as a base. Give about 4% for maneuvers, that 29% defense can turn to 39% defense which is a huge bump in survival, especially on a dominator who doesn't have another means to buff/heal him.

 

Let's say you have a FF controller, especially Fire/FF. The shields and maneuvers give about 33.5% defense. Getting 10% more to give them 43% is almost capped and makes a huge difference on the pets survival.

 

Another big one is my plant/traps controller. Between creepers and fly trap as well as acid mortar and FFgen, on top of stacking with ffgen and maneuvers, those aura IOs i have in him make a huge difference to keeping all those pets alive especially with triage/spirit tree helping to *heal* them. Even/especially on the creepers i noticed a difference when i got those IOs with the way the build works.

 

I'm not granting that they're not much more useful on the MM in general, but they do have uses out side of MMs, and I don't think it would be right to get rid of those for the non-MM classes that do use them.

 

I fully get what you're saying, I don't use those aura IOs on most of my troller/doms but that is usually more of a matter of slots than anything else, doesn't mean I wouldn't like to fit them on the pet if i could, and that I don't have builds that do in fact use them. Perhaps what we would need is to make those sets "loyal pet" IO's, and then the new ones "intelligent pet" IOs with the new aura IO and separate that they can't use one vs another. That would be a lot of new IOs though.

[Monos King]

1 hour ago, WindDemon21 said:

Jack frost is a perfect example. He has 25% defense as a base. Give about 4% for maneuvers, that 29% defense can turn to 39% defense which is a huge bump in survival, especially on a dominator who doesn't have another means to buff/heal him.

You kinda proved my point though; dominators do have another means to keep him alive: CC and simply murdering everything trying to kill him. Controllers have everlasting CC and buffs.

 

And the bigger point is, masterminds are completely dependent on every single one of their pets to survive and do their job. That is not true of the control pets, and you listing the other insane melody of different means they have like 25% base def and spirit tree just makes me further realize the huge gap between control and MM pet appeal. Not only do control pets have better stats, more or simply existing CC, but they can be resummoned immediately and with little endurance. I see why control classes don't often use the auras. Creepers literally auto die and auto revive themselves.

 

What controller is actually running into the fray and is the sole means of keeping all the carrion and traps pets alive anyway, and can't do so with the intense CC offered by plants? Are you talking about farming? At like +4x8? Farming isn't even a given for every or even any AT, if your non-tank class ability to farm is impeded by the transformation of auras for the AT that is lacking and truly needs modification for their 1-50 ordinary gameplays feasibility, I think that is a secondary issue. A players luxury to be even more monstrously OP shouldn't be a barrier for achieving proper performance elsewhere, especially with something so minor as control pets being slightly more incredibly long lived. Of course, if your next piece of evidence shows that that is super helpful outside of highly leveled solo instances, then I'd be won over there. Despite that, my point about control pets not being necessary to control performance, however, would stand.

 

I'm just not sold that controllers need the auras in any way. And part of this conversation is pretty much that "needing" the auras for baseline performance to begin with, needing outside additional IOs just to be viable, is stupid and needs to change. So if you can prove this caveat true, you should probably be proposing a means for innate +survivability for control pets (that they 100% do not need). Like, universal pet survivability increase without IOs. The difference between control and MM pets, especially with the instances you provided, is that the auras are not a luxury. They are a toll. 

[WindDemon21]

12 hours ago, Monos King said:

You kinda proved my point though; dominators do have another means to keep him alive: CC and simply murdering everything trying to kill him. Controllers have everlasting CC and buffs.

 

And the bigger point is, masterminds are completely dependent on every single one of their pets to survive and do their job. That is not true of the control pets, and you listing the other insane melody of different means they have like 25% base def and spirit tree just makes me further realize the huge gap between control and MM pet appeal. Not only do control pets have better stats, more or simply existing CC, but they can be resummoned immediately and with little endurance. I see why control classes don't often use the auras. Creepers literally auto die and auto revive themselves.

 

What controller is actually running into the fray and is the sole means of keeping all the carrion and traps pets alive anyway, and can't do so with the intense CC offered by plants? Are you talking about farming? At like +4x8? Farming isn't even a given for every or even any AT, if your non-tank class ability to farm is impeded by the transformation of auras for the AT that is lacking and truly needs modification for their 1-50 ordinary gameplays feasibility, I think that is a secondary issue. A players luxury to be even more monstrously OP shouldn't be a barrier for achieving proper performance elsewhere, especially with something so minor as control pets being slightly more incredibly long lived. Of course, if your next piece of evidence shows that that is super helpful outside of highly leveled solo instances, then I'd be won over there. Despite that, my point about control pets not being necessary to control performance, however, would stand.

 

I'm just not sold that controllers need the auras in any way. And part of this conversation is pretty much that "needing" the auras for baseline performance to begin with, needing outside additional IOs just to be viable, is stupid and needs to change. So if you can prove this caveat true, you should probably be proposing a means for innate +survivability for control pets (that they 100% do not need). Like, universal pet survivability increase without IOs. The difference between control and MM pets, especially with the instances you provided, is that the auras are not a luxury. They are a toll. 

I would, and have agreed that they are much more necessary on the MM. I'm simply stating that there ARE uses for them outside of MMs, so it shouldn't impede on those just because you prefer MMs over troller/doms. And you also proved my point, and went against yourself in a way as well. The aura IOs shouldn't be meant to be required for any AT. They should be nice to help them out and make things smoother.

 

The BIG problem, is if MMs are NEEDING those, then the MM needs re-looked at as a whole as to why those are so needed. The big thing as I've stated before is the training buffs needing to be on an auto aura. Then they wouldn't need to survive as much if you just recast them and are done with them. And as to the troller/doms, while not 100% necessary, they do their intended function, and make them more survivable so you don't have to micromanage them as much, not just for farming situations. I wouldn't farm with a fire/ff, but it sure is nice to not have to keep attention to the imps as much and actually have them not insta-die against AVs.

 

I think allowing the pet IO sets to go into the MM attacks is the best solution for both the more this conversation goes on.

Edited March 29, 2020 by WindDemon21

[Monos King]

12 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

And you also proved my point, and went against yourself in a way as well. The aura IOs shouldn't be meant to be required for any AT. They should be nice to help them out and make things smoother.

This has been the point from the beginning Wind! How did I go against myself lol

This is correct. MMs need to be relooked, reworked. This thread consists of proposals for doing so, and the equip changes are one of them. 

Maybe we've been misinterpreting each other. I agree no AT should need the auras, but again, MMs are the only AT that needs them. I don't think the minor or specific instances you mentioned will actually see themselves impeded by converting the auras. Don't forget, they'll be replaced with something else. Don't be mistaken, I'm not pushing these changes simply because I prefer MMs over trolls; I've spoken to a few. In terms of performance, they are just not impacted by these changes except for in outlier situations. See below.

16 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

I wouldn't farm with a fire/ff, but it sure is nice to not have to keep attention to the imps as much and actually have them not insta-die against AVs

I agree, but I can't hammer in enough that performance in something like farms shouldn't be a component of a discussion like this. When the weakest of the control pets go up against an archvillain yeah, they're going to die. The fact that that is the only instance in which the auras actually show significance again proves my point. Especially considering they still wouldn't actually die if you were in a team with a tank and not soloing, and that if they did you could Resummon them. When you start referencing maxed out abilities in something that regards 1-50 gameplay it just becomes balancing around the elite, which is never a good idea. If we were doing that, this conversation wouldn't even be pertinent because any maxed out character is technically viable. If you slightly lose the ability to overperform for the sake of general performance elsewhere, it doesn't matter is what I'm saying. Yes, I suppose it is nice not to have to micromanage as expected, but that leisure isn't worth sacrificing easy balance changes for.

37 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

while not 100% necessary, they do their intended function

Well yeah, they help if your pet's already durable. Again, it doesn't matter that you won't be as leisurely soloing AVs, if that's the reason you need auras it demonstrates perfectly that you don't need auras. With that in mind, conversion into damage or debuff procs will still actually be a straight buff to both trolls and masterminds with the correct application. Imagine your carrion being granted a reoccurring -to hit or negative energy damage with the new pet procs. It would be wonderful. This offers the opportunity for a new realm of IOs with the new Recharge Intensive and Upgrade Integral procs. Doesn't that sound great? I think it does!

46 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

I think allowing the pet IO sets to go into the MM attacks is the best solution for both the more this conversation goes on.

Thats an interesting suggestion I think I've seen a few people propose in some way. If anything, I think letting the MM ATOs get slotted into attacks would be pretty helpful too. That's one limitation both control and MMs face with ATOs, although it makes sense for them since the ATOs currently improve their CC and not damage.

[Monos King]

@WindDemon21 I also can't get behind your suggestion of the auto-equip because of how integral they are to the feeling of progression in MMs. Unless you're saying you still purchase the power, but it's just always activated. Which would be a straight buff, you're right.

 

But I STILL wouldn't be able to get behind it because at the end of the day, I actually like the inherent disadvantages the class has to overcome to be effective. I just don't want them to suck. The need to expend endurance often, and potential to deliberate which pets to resummon for a particular urgent instance are engaging obstacles to overcome, and would be fun if they weren't constant death sentences because the AT had problems that render it impotent. 

If the henchmen were in good condition, then the need to resummon them at times would just be an aspect of the archetype like blasters low survival or defenders low damage. I don't think playing MMs should be riskless, or that we should be proposing convenience based buffs that eliminate weaknesses of the class. I just don't want there to be issues that make it ineffective entirely.

[WindDemon21]

38 minutes ago, Monos King said:

@WindDemon21 I also can't get behind your suggestion of the auto-equip because of how integral they are to the feeling of progression in MMs. Unless you're saying you still purchase the power, but it's just always activated. Which would be a straight buff, you're right.

 

But I STILL wouldn't be able to get behind it because at the end of the day, I actually like the inherent disadvantages the class has to overcome to be effective. I just don't want them to suck. The need to expend endurance often, and potential to deliberate which pets to resummon for a particular urgent instance are engaging obstacles to overcome, and would be fun if they weren't constant death sentences because the AT had problems that render it impotent. 

If the henchmen were in good condition, then the need to resummon them at times would just be an aspect of the archetype like blasters low survival or defenders low damage. I don't think playing MMs should be riskless, or that we should be proposing convenience based buffs that eliminate weaknesses of the class. I just don't want there to be issues that make it ineffective entirely.

I have suggested both actually, but of course the most likely would be keeping the equip powers but making them auto auras that proc.

 

Having to equip them during battle like that isn't "part of the playstyle". It's just a hindrance that doesn't need to or should be there. The uniqueness and playstyle of playing a MM is CONTROLLING those pets, and having them be most of your damage/survival and keeping them alive.

 

The weakness of the class is that for one you can't buff the recharge of the pet skills, and that most are very susceptible to knockback, damage, and the like. Also that the main source of your damage doesn't benefit from most IOs and set bonuses either. It doesn't need the upgrades to be clicks simply to be an annoyance, and having them as auto auras doesn't overpower the MMs either.

 

There is no reason valid enough to keep them as click upgrades vs auto auras.

[Monos King]

27 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

Also that the main source of your damage doesn't benefit from most IOs and set bonuses either.

Well IOs are usually a separate consideration from the actual attributes of the AT. I for one, can't stand that unintended disadvantage and IO viability is one of the things I've been pushing for most for MMs.

30 minutes ago, WindDemon21 said:

Having to equip them during battle like that isn't "part of the playstyle". It's just a hindrance that doesn't need to or should be there. The uniqueness and playstyle of playing a MM is CONTROLLING those pets, and having them be most of your damage/survival and keeping them alive.

That's pretty debatable, but if the community and then the devs decide that's a feasible and balanced change I wouldn't be upset. I'm not actively against it, but it does seem to be undercutting the inherent risk-rewards of being a mastermind.

 

Controlling the pets is, of course, just the mechanic of being a MM. That doesn't alone speak to being an advantage or disadvantage without aspects that make it an advantage or disadvantage. But I do think that your suggestions about equips would be helpful, so I guess it all depends on what the developers see as acceptable a change.

[WindDemon21]

 

1 hour ago, Monos King said:

That's pretty debatable, but if the community and then the devs decide that's a feasible and balanced change I wouldn't be upset. I'm not actively against it, but it does seem to be undercutting the inherent risk-rewards of being a mastermind.

 

Controlling the pets is, of course, just the mechanic of being a MM. That doesn't alone speak to being an advantage or disadvantage without aspects that make it an advantage or disadvantage. But I do think that your suggestions about equips would be helpful, so I guess it all depends on what the developers see as acceptable a change.

It's also a matter of fun too, as this is what this game is for. And this is a huge concern regarding that as well. It's not just unnecessary, but it's a huge annoyance dealing with casting, and also waiting for the pets to summon after you cast the power to even be able TO buff them. It was the number one thing that kept me away from even making my first MM. And when they made it an aoe, i gave them a try, and stuck it out through several MMs. And it is consistently the number one reason why i'll just not want to play my MMs and deal with that. I have not come across one person in game who does not feel the same way. No other AT has to deal with such a detrimental and annoying mechanic within their AT, except for basically like melee armor tier 9s with a crash. Which you can see that most people skip due to that, but the problem is that you can't skip those powers on a MM, because they are 100% necessary.

[Doc_Scorpion]

15 hours ago, WindDemon21 said:

The uniqueness and playstyle of playing a MM is CONTROLLING those pets, and having them be most of your damage/survival and keeping them alive.

Precisely.  Which is also exactly why summoning and equipping them during battle is part of the playstyle.

You can't claim the uniqueness and the core of the playstyle lies in "controlling and keeping them alive" and claim that "summoning and equipping during battle" isn't part of the playstyle...  The two positions are mutually incompatible because the latter is implied by the former.  Deciding whether (and when) to re-summon, or to concentrate on the surviving pets, or to use your secondaries, or to run like heck and try again later...  (Or to turn down the difficulty level)  These are the key tactical decisions every MM must make.  It's a very different playstyle, and not one that's for everyone.
 

13 hours ago, WindDemon21 said:

It's also a matter of fun too, as this is what this game is for.

No offense, but that's a weak argument.  Nowhere is it written that all parts of the game will be fun for all people all the time.  From my point of view, if you don't like playing MM's because they're hard to play...  That's not on the AT.  That's a personal choice. 

If you don't find playing MM's to be fun, then just don't play them.